COMMENDED ESSAY, 1898. 
371 
cartridge cases, and the gun has to be made long to obtain the velocity. 
The “ Nordenfelt (Paris) light ” is not so ambitious as regards muzzle 
velocity, but its shell is too light, though it carries a good number. 
The Cail, 1896 ” equipment has an unnecessarily high velocity, and 
uses a heavy cartridge case. 
The best equipment in Table A seems to be the “ Canet, 1896, light ” The best light 
firing a shell of fair weight with a satisfactory velocity : the gun and eqmpment ' 
carriage together being at the same time probably quite heavy enough to 
allow of the recoil being easily dealt with. 
Turning now to Table B, it will be best to criticize the equipments in 
order. 
The “ Hotchkiss ” has a fair shell, and carries a good many rounds 
without loss of mobility : but the bullets in the shell are small, and 
demand a high velocity, to resist which the weight of the mounting and 
piece does not seem enough. 
The “ Schneider ” equipments—if the figures given are to be trusted— 
are completely spoilt by the enormous weight of the cartridge case used. 
The two “ Krupp ” equipments would probably give a good fire effect 
except that the bullets are too small : of the two the “ heavy ” is to be 
preferred, the “ light ” being not light enough. 
The “ Nordenfelt (Paris) heavy ” is good in every respect—bullets in 
shell, mobility, number of rounds carried and velocity—but one, 
namely the use of a cartridge case ; though this latter is made very 
light. 
Weight of gun and carriage, size of bullets, and velocity would appear 
to be good in the “ Maxim-Nordenfelt heavy” but the shell is rather 
light and a heavy cartridge case is used. 
The “ Canet, 1896, heavy ” appears to be good all round, except that 
the number of rounds in the limber is small. 
The “ St. Chamond heavy ” is spoilt by small bullets, necessitating 
very high velocity, and consequently large fuze error and long heavy 
gun : the latter entailing a small number of rounds in the limber to 
keep down the total weight. The “ Elswick ” equipment suffers in the 
same way, and the shell is light in comparison with the weight behind 
the team : it is not clear why so few rounds are carried in the limber, 
seeing that our 12-pr. H.A. limber, weighing only 14*5 cwt., packed, 
carries 46 rounds, using shell of the same weight. 
The “ Swiss ” gun should have very good fire effect indeed, and the 
recoil appears to be satisfactorily met: but the number of rounds carried 
is small, though the wagon is very heavy. 
On the whole the “ Swiss” appears the most satisfactory of the heavy The best heavy 
Q.F. equipments, with the “ Canet heavy ” a very good second. equipments. 
It should thus be allowable to say that Q.F. field equipments have 
already been produced which seem likely, when well handled, to give 
good results in the field ; though none can yet be considered perfect. 
III.— Summary. 
An attempt has been made in these pages to show that the use of 
Q.F. guns in the field would give one indisputably great advantage, 
namely, a vastly increased power to crush an enemy at a favourable 
moment by their rapid fire, that is, a large increase in the actual power 
in the fight of an Artillery so armed. 
The disadvantages of increased difficulty in ammunition supply, of 
